Supreme Court Allows Collaborator's Arbitration Request Despite No Privity of Contract — Joint Undertaking Makes Collaborator Veritable Party to Arbitration Agreement. The collaborator, though a non-signatory to the main contract, was held entitled to invoke the arbitration clause due to the Deed of Joint Undertaking and subsequent conduct of the employer.

  • 13
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The dispute arose from a contract for installing a Coal Handling Plant Package for the Nabinagar Thermal Power Project. The employer, Respondents, awarded the contract to a contractor, who collaborated with The appellant to meet technical eligibility criteria. As part of the bid, the collaborator executed a Deed of Joint Undertaking (DJU) with the contractor in favor of the employer, assuming joint and several responsibility for the contract's performance. The main contract between the employer and contractor contained an arbitration clause. Subsequently, the contractor faced liquidation and was ordered to be liquidated on 16.01.2020. The employer then called upon the collaborator to fulfil its obligations under the DJU. A tripartite agreement was entered into in 2016 to ensure direct payments to the collaborator. When disputes arose, the collaborator issued a notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking consent to refer the matter to arbitration. The employer refused, citing no privity of contract. The collaborator filed a petition under Section 11(6) before the High Court, which was rejected. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, holding that the DJU made the collaborator an inextricable part of the contract with joint and several liability. The employer's subsequent communications and the tripartite agreement reaffirmed the collaborator's obligations. The Court set aside the High Court's order and appointed a sole arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes.

Headnote

A) Arbitration Law - Non-Signatory to Arbitration Agreement - Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Collaborator's right to invoke arbitration - The collaborator, though not a signatory to the main contract, executed a Deed of Joint Undertaking (DJU) as part of the bid, making it an inextricable part of the contract with joint and several liability. The employer later called upon the collaborator to fulfil obligations under the DJU. Held that the collaborator is a veritable party to the contract and entitled to invoke the arbitration clause (Paras 7-11).

B) Arbitration Law - Appointment of Arbitrator - Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - High Court's rejection set aside - The High Court erred in rejecting the Section 11(6) petition on the ground of no privity of contract, ignoring the DJU and subsequent communications that established the collaborator's integral role. Held that the collaborator is entitled to arbitration (Paras 11-12).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether a collaborator, who is a non-signatory to the main contract but executed a Deed of Joint Undertaking (DJU) as part of the bid, is entitled to invoke the arbitration clause in the main contract against the employer.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Appeal allowed. High Court judgment set aside. Petition under Section 11(6) allowed. Justice (Retd.) Chakradhari Sharan Singh appointed as sole arbitrator. Arbitrator to proceed in accordance with law and make declaration under Section 12 within 15 days. Registry to inform the arbitrator.

Law Points

  • Non-signatory can invoke arbitration if veritable party to arbitration agreement
  • Joint and several liability under Deed of Joint Undertaking makes collaborator inextricable part of contract
  • Tripartite agreement does not eclipse original contract but reaffirms obligations
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (SC) (05) 15

Civil Appeal No. of 2026 [@ Special Leave Petition (C) No. 33128 of 2025]

2026-05-07

SANJAY KUMAR J. , K. VINOD CHANDRAN J.

2026 INSC 458

Sridhar Potaraju (Senior Counsel for appellant), Aman Lekhi (Senior Counsel for respondent)

Elecon Engineering Company Limited

Bhartiya Rail Bijlee Company Limited & Anr.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Civil appeal against High Court order rejecting petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of arbitrator.

Remedy Sought

Appellant (collaborator) sought appointment of arbitrator to adjudicate disputes with the employer.

Filing Reason

Employer refused consent for arbitration citing no privity of contract, despite collaborator's role under Deed of Joint Undertaking.

Previous Decisions

High Court rejected the Section 11(6) petition on the ground of no privity of contract.

Issues

Whether a non-signatory to a contract containing an arbitration clause can invoke arbitration if it is a veritable party to the arbitration agreement. Whether the Deed of Joint Undertaking and subsequent conduct of the employer make the collaborator a party to the arbitration agreement.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that without collaboration, the contractor could not meet eligibility criteria; DJU made collaborator an inextricable part of the contract; employer later called upon collaborator to fulfil obligations. Respondent argued that the Section 21 notice sought consent, indicating no arbitration clause; tripartite agreement eclipsed earlier contract; no privity of contract.

Ratio Decidendi

A non-signatory to a contract can invoke the arbitration clause if it is a veritable party to the arbitration agreement, as evidenced by the Deed of Joint Undertaking making the collaborator an inextricable part of the contract with joint and several liability, and the employer's subsequent conduct calling upon the collaborator to fulfil obligations under the DJU.

Judgment Excerpts

The question to be decided is as to whether the Collaborator/Associate is a veritable party to the contract, which from the very terms of the contract and those discernible from the bid document and requirements thereof, has to be answered in the affirmative. We are of the opinion that the contract by itself necessitated the execution of joint undertaking by the Contractor and the Collaborator who had the 'joint and several' liability for the due completion of the contract.

Procedural History

The collaborator issued a Section 21 notice on 02.07.2022 seeking consent for arbitration. Employer refused on 29.07.2022. Collaborator filed Section 11(6) petition before High Court, which was rejected. Collaborator appealed to Supreme Court by special leave. Supreme Court granted leave and allowed the appeal.

Acts & Sections

  • Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: Section 11(6), Section 12, Section 21
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Collaborator's Arbitration Request Despite No Privity of Contract — Joint Undertaking Makes Collaborator Veritable Party to Arbitration Agreement. The collaborator, though a non-signatory to the main contract, was held entitled...
Related Judgement
High Court High Court Allows Compensation to Family in Railway Death Case, Reversing Tribunal's Trespassing Finding. Death qualified as untoward incident under Railways Act as Railways failed to prove trespassing despite absence of eyewitnesses, with Station Ma...